legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Wilson v. County of Orange
This appeal concerns a long and contentious dispute between Lyle Wilson and his former employer, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office (the County). Wilson was discharged from his employment in 2002. After six years of litigation and legal maneuvering, a trial court entered judgment in Wilson’s favor and issued a peremptory writ ordering the County to vacate his discharge from employment. The trial court determined one of the charges supporting Wilson’s discharge was barred by the statute of limitations. The County did not appeal this judgment. Instead, the County amended Wilson’s employment file to show he was terminated in 2002 for two non-time barred reasons.
The trial court, and a different panel of this court, concluded backdating a second discharge violated the peremptory writ. (Wilson v. Superior Court (Apr. 7, 2010, G040875) [nonpub. opn.] (hereafter Wilson I).) The backdating effectively deprived Wilson of any administrative remedies to challenge the discharge and eliminated his ability to seek backpay. We upheld the trial court’s order finding the County’s attempt to backdate a second discharge was null and void. (Ibid.)
Thereafter, the County vacated the 2002 discharge, reinstated Wilson with pay, but placed him on paid administrative leave. The trial court ordered the County to determine within 90 days how much Wilson was due in backpay and benefits. It also ruled any dispute as to the amount of backpay would have to be resolved in a new action.
On October 26, 2010, the County paid Wilson $97,304 for backpay and benefits. Wilson filed the underlying petition for a writ of mandate, seeking an order requiring the County to pay him an additional $1,108,782, as well as a retirement credit of 7.9 years. A few weeks later, the County discharged Wilson from his employment based on two non-time barred charges.
The trial court sustained the County’s demurrer on the basis Wilson failed to allege compliance with the Government Tort Claims Act (Gov. Code, § 900 et seq., hereafter referred to as Claims Act).[1] The court dismissed Wilson’s writ petition. On appeal, Wilson asserts the Claims Act does not apply. We agree and reverse the judgment.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale